elder, horace, c 1 3 1952

8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/elder-horace-c-1-3-1952 1/20

Horace, C., I, 3Author(s): J. P. ElderSource: The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 73, No. 2 (1952), pp. 140-158Published by: The Johns Hopkins University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/291810

Accessed: 16/08/2010 06:11

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The

American Journal of Philology.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/stable/291810?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/291810?origin=JSTOR-pdf

8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952


HORACE, C., I, 3.

In an introductory note to Horace's propempticon to Virgil

(C., I, 3),1 C. H. Moore in his edition of 1902 commented: 2

1 The most interesting comments on this poem are still, to my mind,

those of G. L. Hendrickson, " Horace's Propempticon to Virgil," C. J.,

III (1908), pp. 100-4, and A. Kiessling-R. Heinze, Q. Horatius Flaccus

(Oden u. Epoden) ad loc. For Horace's indebtedness to Callimachus

here, see G. Pasquali, Orazio Lirico (Firenze, 1920), pp. 260 ff., who,however, seems at times a bit imaginative in his reconstructions.

For some recent studies on this ode, see L. Delatte, " Caelum ipsum

petimus stultitia," L'Ant. Cl., IV (1935), pp. 309-36 (who argues that

Horace, under Cynic influence, is here condemning the study of cos-

mology, astronomy, and astrology [such an ode as I, 11 does doubtless

reflect the poet's real views, but then, cf. C., II, 17]) ; L. Herrmann,

"Nostrum Scelus," Rev. Belge, XV (1936), pp. 981-5 (who holds that the

nostrum scelus refers to Virgil's sceleris nostri of E., 4, 13 [but see below,

pp. 157 f.] which in turn depends upon Cat., 64, 397 if. which relate

inter alia to fratricide. Herrmann cites Epod., 7, 18, C., I, 35, 33 and I,

2, 29, in the last of which, he maintains, the scelus is the murder of

Caesar, whereas the scelus in I, 3, 39 is more general, and C., I, 3 chiefly

deals with man's " audace dans le crime." As for date and occasion of

I, 3, he would refer it to the fall of 38 B. C., and suggests that Virgil

accompanied Maecenas then to Athens or was planning to do so); P.

Culmont, "Horace, Ode I, 3," Les itudes Class., VIII (1939), pp. 87-90

(on handling of "le topique du genre et de l'espece"); A. Hahn,

"Horace's Odes to Vergil," T. A. P. A., LXXVI (1945), pp. xxxii-iii

(" The poem, which has been thought tactless, is really humorous, as theextravagant tone suggests; Horace is teasing Vergil, who inveighed

against sea-faring in Ecl. 4, for crossing the sea himself, . . ."); W. Wili,

Horaz u. d. aug. Kultur (Basel, 1948), pp. 225 f. (who declares that" hSht sich das Lied . . . zum Weltgedicht, das in der romischen Antike

ausser Horaz als 'reflexive Form' keinen Vergleich kennt, sondern diesen

nur im Chorlied der griechischen Tragodie gewinnen wiirde "-a view

which is not inharmonious with the burden of the present study).

In this essay it is assumed that C., I-III were published in 23 B. C.

(although see F. L. Santee, "The Date of Publication of Horace's Odes

I-III," T. A. P. A., LXII [1931], p. xxxii, who also allows for 22 B.C.),that the Virgil of the ode is the poet (because of the animae dimidium

meae and the position of the ode in the collection), and that the poem

refers to a projected trip of which we know nothing from Virgil's

biographers.

2C. H. Moore, Horace, Odes and Epodes (New York, 1902), p. 63,

apparently following W. Y. Sellar, Virgil (Oxford, 1897), p. 118.

140

8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952


HORACE, "C.," I, 3. 141

It is remarkable that after the first eight verses which con-tain the

propempticon proper, Horace,who was

usuallyso

tactful, should quickly revert to the old philosophical and

theological notions of the sinfulness of human enterprisewithout observing how out of place such ideas were here,when Vergil was just about to show such enterprise byundertaking this voyage.

This comment, which probablyseemed to many an unsatisfactory

one, was questioned-and answered-in 1907 by Professor Hen-

drickson.3 In a typically illuminating study he fully acquitted

Horace of this charge of tactlessness, and stoutly confirmedthe poem's formal unity.4 "These reflections," he suggested,

"though put in the enunciative form, were in reality an expres-sion of grief, an imprecation upon man's audacious enterprise,which had devised the means of separating friends," and he went

on to show that Horace was thoroughly familiar with the tradi-

tional elements of this form.

The present essay aims at suggesting some additional inter-

pretations, based upon Hendrickson's conclusion that the poemreflects Horace's genuine grief at the impending departure of

his friend, albeit this grief is expressedin a highly formal mould.

The interpretations proposedbelow will deal with Horace's treat-

ment of "man's audacious enterprise," by examining the moods

and insights which the sequenceof emotions, arousedby his grief,

may have momentarily inspired in him as he worked with the

conventionalpatterns

of form and motives.

In his comment quoted above, Moore implied that Horace in

this ode had resurrectedthese " old philosophical and theologicalnotions" out of a sort of quaint and whimsical archaism, and

that they meant virtually nothing to him. They would, then, be

merely outmoded, conventional views, without significance for a

member of the Augustan world. Such an attitude toward this

poem is not uncommon.

A minor criticism that can be levelled against such an inter-

pretation is that it fails to consider that hostility to "progress"

3 See ref. in note 1.

K. Prodinger, " Zu Horazens Ode I 3," Wien. Stud., XXIX (1907),

p. 171, even went so far as to conclude that C., I, 3 is actually two

separate poems.

8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952


J. P. ELDER.

was likely to be encouraged by Stoic doctrines,5 and that Stoic-

ism's appeal to the eclectic Horace must ever be reckoned with.6Indeed, the doctrine was by no means limited to the Stoics and

Cynics. Lucretius speaks of the improba navigii ratio (V, 1006),7and one may guess that this, like much else in Lucretius, by now

'iIn general, probably the viewpoint of J. B. Bury, The Idea of Prog-ress (New York, 1932), pp. 11-15 (who comments on C., I, 3 on pp. 17-18)on antiquity's lack of a concept of progress is correct (though, as Pro-

fessor A. D. Nock points out to me, it must be here and there modified

in the case of some thinkers in the light of such statements as Polyb.,TX, 2, 5; Cic., Rep., II, 2 and perhaps Off., I, 11; Sen., Ep., 64, 7-8. See

also W. Nestle's interesting " Griechische Geschichtsphilosophie," Archiv

f. Gesch. d. Philos., XLI [1932], pp. 80-114). Certainly the old views

of a "golden age " of simplicity, of the wisdom of the past, and of man's

subsequent degeneration were generally held as true throughout an-

tiquity, although in some respects Epicureanism, of course, offers a con-

siderable departure from the norm (see Bury, op. cit., pp. 15-17 and the

views and references given by M. Taylor, "Progress and Primitivism in

Lucretius," A. J.P., LXVIII [1947], pp. 180-94). As for Stoicism, its

subscription to the common theory of world-cycles, and its advocacy of

the simple life according to Nature (with eulogy of primitivism, e.g.

Sen., Ep., 90, 4-5 and passim) tended to prevent the adherents of this

school from acquiring a concept of progress (albeit Seneca allowed for

the advancement of knowledge in a unique fashion; see his Q. N., VII,

30, 5 and Bury, op. cit., pp. 13 f.). Whether, however, one can go so far

as L. P. Wilkinson in his excellent Horace and His Lyric Poetry (Cam-

bridge, 1946), p. 81, as to speak, anent C., I, 3, of a " Stoic hatred of all

progress " is not easy to determine. The long and the short is that we

appear to have scant evidence on the various Stoic views heldin the

Augustan period. For one thing, diatribes against excesses were common

to most moralists. For another, Stoic doctrines, unlike Epicurean, were

constantly being changed and modified-one cannot speak of an " ortho-

dox " Stoicism-and it is hard indeed to fancy that amid such diver-

gences one can hope for much certainty in sorting our strata and groups

(as, for Stoicism of the late republic, Cicero's N. D. illustrates many of

the difficulties). Finally, it were bold, and doubtless foolish, to seek

consistent philosophical adherence, for any period, in such poets as

Virgil and Horace.

On Horace's indebtedness to the diatribe, with its Cynic-Stoic doc-trine of life "according to Nature," and especially to Bion the Borys-

thenite, see R. Heinze, De Horatio Bionis Imitatore (Bonn, 1889).7 I am not concerned here with the problem of the reading navigii

(which indeed is suspect), but with the meaning of improba. Here it

cannot mean "sinful," but rather (see T. L. L., sub voc.) fraudulenta

(an interpretation supported by the pellacia subdola and in fraudem

of the preceding lines).

142

8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952


8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952


J. P. ELDER.

condemnation of sailing as sinful. Sailing becomes here only a

symbol for man's sinfulness. Nor does sailing itself occupy thepoet's entire attention. For he moves on to consider other forms

of impietas and the tragic ruin it entails.'0 Here the progressionof instances-Virgil, mankind, Prometheus, Daedalus, and Her-

cules-is highly important. For it may let us know that, after

all, the poet is not so much interested in the forms and nature of

impietas as in his developing contemplation of man's audacia in

his sinfulness. The ode, then, according to such an interpre-

tation, is a study, set forth in a careful formalism, of man'sgreatness in the face of Heaven's decrees-in fine, a study of

man's tragic heroism.ll

10In this connection one may wonder whether there is more meaning

in the Melpomene of C., III, 30, 16 than usually is granted (on which

see A. W. Verrall, Studies in the Odes of Horace [London, 1884], Essay I

[Melpomene], pp. 1-10).

l Stobaei Hermetica, Exc. 23, 44-46 (W. Scott, Hermetica [Oxford,

1924], I, pp. 483-4),to which Professor A. D. Nock has called

myatten-

tion, is full of importance for the interpretation of C., I, 3. In this

passage Momus criticizes Hermes for making man, and points out that

if man has the unfettered use of his senses, in his audacity man will

explore the secrets of earth, sea, and heaven, and may even dare to storm

the heavens themselves (cf. caelum ipsum petimus). As a check on man's

aggression, Momus asks that man be given irrational passions.As Ferguson notes, Hermetica, IV, pp. 455-61 (and also see R. Reit-

zenstein, "Die Gottin Psyche," Sitzungsb. Heid., Philos.-hist. KI., VIII

[1917], 10. Abh.) this discussion apparently reflects the Stoic diatribe

in contents and form, with Momus complaining about faculties givenman by Pronoia, and with Hermes assuming the usual position of Pro-

metheus. Momus, then, would be the critic of Prometheus (Hermes),

and his jealous criticism would be that man will become virtually a god,

unless care be taken.

In such a debate, one may recognize both hostile criticism of man's

misuse of his faculties and, so to speak, an inverted panegyric on man.

The parallels between this passage in the Hermetica and C., I, 3 are

striking, and surely Reitzenstein, op. cit., pp. 76 ff., is right in proposing

that both works go back in part at least to the same tradition. The

Hermetic passage would seem to reflect a teleological debate on Pronoia

(helped on by Momus' adverse criticisms which, however, will ultimately

be used to justify Stoic doctrine on Providence and Necessity), with

elements of the Prometheus story brought in. But then one must ask:

do both works-the Hermetic passage and C., I, 3-share the same mood

and temper?The Momus-Hermes passage would seem to emphasize man's intellec-

144

8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952


HORACE, "C.," I, 3.

First, a word or two on the form, so that we can see how

Horace handled the traditional elements.12 About the historyof the T7rpoT7f7rTTLKoVSC. 1Ldo> we know little. In earlier Greek

literature lines of farewell and tirades upon sailing and the first

sailor occur occasionally. But these are not propemptica,though

quite possibly germs of the form. A fragment of Sappho maybe the opening of a propempticon, but this is a sheer guess.13It is not until we come down to the Hellenistic period-to Theo-

critus,14 Callimachus,l5 and Erinna 16-that we can definitely

putour

fingeron

examplesof the form. Hence to the

presentwriter, although Theocritus' humorous twist to his propempticon-

passage might appear to indicate serious predecessors,all in all

the form would seem to be a Hellenistic invention. And the

conceit of addressing the ship, a device first to be noted in Calli-

machus, perhaps smacks of Alexandrianism.17

But if we wish to know the rules for the form, for actual

practice we must turn to Ovid 18and Statius,19 and for theory

tual audacity (cf. Man., II, 127 and Plin. Maj., II, 95), and the scelushere may be chiefly curiosity of mind. But in Horace, as Ferguson, op.cit., p. 458, note 6, remarks,the audacity consists more of man's physicalinvasion of other elements than land. But more important, does Horace,as Reitzenstein suggests, share Momus' "world-weary pessimism" andthe belief that man's audacity is folly? Horace agrees with Momus,I grant, that the exercise of such audacia is folly, but to my mind hedoes not share Momus'pessimism. Quite the contrary For in Horaceit is the panegyric of man (expressed in twisted form in the Hermetic

passage) which dominates, and Horace's ultimate feeling would seem tobe one of admiration at man's audacia rather than a lengthily-reasonedacceptanceof Necessity.

12 On this subject, see F. Jager, Das antike Propemptikon u. d. 17.

Gedicht d. Paulinus von Nola (Diss., Rosenheim, 1913).13Berl. Klassikertexte, 5, 2, 12 f. (Diehl 96) ; on this frag. see U. von

Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, apphou. Simonides (Berlin, 1913), pp. 48-50.47, 52-89, on which see A. S. F. Gow, Theocritus (Cambridge,1950),

II, ad loc.15 Frag. 400 Pfeiffer. Horacesurely had this poem,as well as Meleager,

A. P., XII, 52, in his mind as a mise en scene; see discussion of Pasquali(cited in note 1).

" Frag. 2 Diehl.17 C., I, 3 is not addressed to Virgil, as the 0. C.D., sub Propemptikon,

states.18 Am., II, 11.

19 Silv., III, 2.

3

145

8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952


J. P. ELDER.

to the late rhetorician Menander,20and from them attempt to

reconstructthe traditional elements. Hendrickson, and later andmore fully, Felix Jager, have performedthis task.21 The upshot

is, as the commentaryof Kiessling-Heinze with its usual discern-

ment notes, that Horace by no means slavishly followed the usual

?Torol,but in fact was consciously radical. Such a conclusion

does not seem startling in the light of what we have learned from

Wilamowitz, Reitzenstein, Pasquali, and others, as to how Horace

used Hellenistic motives and forms. Here in this ode, for

example, Horace says nothing about the usual happy reunionwith his friend at the end, nor indeed a word at all about his

return. More important, with a feeling for e~vlut'a, he eschews

the customary TOdTrof cursing the inventor of ships and sailing-the axETXcTaaauopn which Ovid and Statius revelled-and, with

a transition of Pindaric swiftness, he passes to reflections on the

first sailor's hardihoodand the general theme which occupies the

rest of the poem, man's boldness in impietas and the many forms

of death which await him because of his nefas, stuttitia, andscelus. It is not Fate nor God, he declares, who brings woes

and tribulations on mankind, but man himself with his i,pLrs,

his lack of pious submission and restraint. And this generaltheme is brought up to date, up to Horace's own age, by the

present tenses in the abrupt and ironical last strophes:

nil mortalibus ardui est:caelum ipsum petimus stultitia, neque

per nostrum patimur scelusiracunda Iovem ponere fulmina.

If, then, Horace does not indulge in a number of the usual

dTootof the genre, may we not consider that what he says here

was meaningful to him and, in his estimation, likely to be

meaningful to Virgil, too? Otherwise,one is forced to conclude

that Horace designed the appeal of the ode to lie wholly either

in form or in humor.22

2o Spengel, Rhet. Graec., III, pp. 395-9.

21See notes 1 and 12.

22W. Y. Sellar, Virgil (Oxford, 1887), pp. 120-1, and J. W. Duff, A

Lit. Hist. of Rome-Golden Age (New York, 1927), p. 519, raise the

question of humor here; Hahn (cited in note 1) considers this the

explanation of the ode.

146

8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952


HORACE, " C.," I, 3.

This leads us to an analysis of the poem. Lines 1-8 are a

formal prayer for Virgil's safety, but in tone more than formal.For the animae dimidium meae deeply pervades these lines and

sets the opening mood. If it be argued that this phrase is but

a translation of Meleager,23 nd anyway a commonplace,24t must

be replied at once and strongly that to use tradition in this way-

especially Greek tradition for the friend sailing to Greece-is

the most effective way of expressing the fullness of one's feelings.What we know of the relations between Virgil and Horace-and

the admittedly sparse facts need not be given here-might seemto tell us that Horace would write his friend a personal and

significant poem. Mutual poetic experiences and mutual affec-

tion would then underlie the animae dimidium meae. If we can

understand the emotional color of this section of the poem, this

may help us to find out what Horace felt and thought when he

wrote his friend about to set out finibus Atticis.

Sadness and grief at the prospect of being separated from

Virgil is the underlying note, it would seem, of this first, out-wardly formal, section. This grief, in turn, leads the poet on

in a progression of emotions to the fear of forever losing his

friend, and this feeling carries the poet on in the later sections

to quite different moods and thoughts-from Virgil's own courageto the heroic boldness of man in his impiety, and its vast and

ruinous consequences.All this is done, admittedly, with touches of humor, at least

at the start and close. Horace is not the sentimentalist who leapsat once into the fullness of any mood, and he constantly uses hiswit or whimsey to serve as a guard against any such romantic

plunge, just as he often ends on a note of self-depreciation or

irony. Typical is the amusingly pretentious

obstrictis aliis praeter Iapyga (4)

and the commercial image of Virgil as a depositum, carried out

with its creditum debesand reddas incolumem. Then, too, how-ever conventional it be to invoke Venus and the Gemini for a

" See note 15. This frag. of Meleager is perhaps part of a pro-pempticon.

"4See N. Festa, "Animaedimidiummeae,"Sophia,I (1933), pp.436-41.Cf. C., II, 17, 5, where Maecenas is similarly called meae partem animae.

147

8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952


J. P. ELDER.

safe voyage, and beyond the fact that Venus as Aeneas' mother

and the Gemini as proverbial protectors of friends might beappropriate here,25 surely Horace is smiling slightly at the

thought of his Virgil entrusted to the care of such divinities-

a pleasant blending of Dichtung and Wahrheit Finally, at the

beginning of the poem, could Horace have recalled with some

amusement that once Virgil himself had reverted to the old

commonplace in describing the new Golden Age?

cedet et ipse mari vector . . . (E., 4, 38).

But one must remember that Horace was one of the few Latin

writers who, disregarding Stoic T7O rperov and Roman gravitas,

daredto mingle the humorousand the serious in the same work.26

One need only think of C., II, 13 on the triste lignum-first the

exaggerated abuse of the wretched tree, then the serious doctrine

that man cannot foresee his end, and the whimsical fantasy of

his personal trip to the underworld and all he would see there.

And this reminds us that he can drop humor as quickly as hecan pick it up, just as in the ode on Cleopatrahe can brusquelyshift from one serious mood to another serious one, quite the

reverse of the first.27

The second section, lines 9-20, deals with sailing and the first

sailor. But the content transcends the traditional pattern. The

first sailor is not cursed. Neither, for that matter, is sailing

itself, albeit nominally sailing is an example of man's impietas.

Rather, the emotional center of this section lies in robur andaes triplex and nec timuit and quem mortis timuit gradum and

siccis oculis monstra natantia. The emphasis, then, is not on

25 G. D. Kellogg, "Horace's Most Ancient Mariner," C. W., XVII

(1924), p. 82, points out that Castor and Pollux were also Argonauts

(and thus connected with the early heroism of sailing). See text below,

p. 157. If in origin the Dioscuri, in Horace's version (cf. C., III,

3, 9-10), were human beings who by their virtues were raised to the

status ofgods,

thenperhaps

the mention of them in line 2, however

conventional, may be of interest alongside the mention of Hercules in

line 36.

26 See the interesting remarks of Wilkinson (cited in note 5), pp. 63 f.

on this matter.

27 And note, too, that C., I, 37 ends as abruptly sans reprise as does

C., I, 3, in a fashion which to later ages and critics might seem quite

unclassical With Horace, of course, this is typical.

148

8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952


HORACE, " C.," , 3. 149

what constitutes impietas but on man's courage in his impietas,

and these lines are really, when all is said and done, lines inpraise of courage.

Now, what of Virgil? At once should we not guess that neither

Virgil nor Horace actually believed that it was sinful or wicked

to sail the seas? The phrase impiae rates (lines 23-24) is not

to be taken seriously; it is only a moralistic commonplace, fre-

quent enough in the Latin poets, and a direct heritage from

Hellenistic philosophy. Doubtless each poet did share the general

Italian aversion to sailing. It is even possible to imagine thatHorace may once have come close to shipwreck.28 Certainly, to

judge from his imagery, the ocean perhaps par excellence was

for him, as to many an ancient poet, the symbol for a wild and

dangerous element over which man had no control and which at

any moment might drag him down to death.29 Thus, to cite but

one example, C., II, 10 both begins and closes with sea-symbolism:

Rectius vives, Licini, neque altum

semper urguendo neque, dum procellascautus horrescis, nimium premendo

litus iniquum.

contrahes vento nimium secundo

turgida vela.

28Cf. C., III, 4, 25-28 and 27, 18-20. On this see T. Frank, Catullus

and Horace (Blackwell, 1928), p. 170 with the suggestion that Horace

"had been sent as the questor's scribe with the fleet which operated

against Sextus Pompey in the year 36, for the fleet was in that yearovertaken by a storm off Palinurus and a large part of it wrecked."

Also see E. Galletier, "Horace et les souvenirs de son voyage en Grece,"L'Ant. Cl., IV (1935), p. 342.

29 On the fear of the sea, see R.-E., 2. Reihe, 3. Halbband, sub Schif-

fahrt, cols. 413-14; also, references collected under "Sailing " and " Sea"

by O. E. Nybakken, "An Analytical Study of Horace's Ideas," Iowa Stud.

Class. Philol., V (1937), p. 84. The dangers associated in the Italian

mind with sea-voyages must here be emphasized, that the extent to

which Horace may reasonably have felt fear for his friend and admired

his courage may be properly understood. Perhaps nothing better illus-trates the important r61e which the hardships and perils of a sea-trip

played in ancient life than the commonness in classical literature of

similes and metaphors dealing with sailing, e.g. the ship of life or of

state or the gaining of the harbor (on which see references noted by

Campbell Bonner, " The Ship of the Soul on a Group of Grave-Stelae

from Terenuthis," Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., LXXXV [1941], p. 87, note 4).

8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952


J. P. ELDER.

And, to be sure, an ethical doctrine is connected in Horace's

mindwith the ocean-the Cynic-Stoic dislike of the mercatoras the symbol for man's boundlessgreed for wealth and luxury,30

the same doctrine enunciated by Aristotle in the Protrepticus:"We ought not to sail to the pillars of Hercules and run many

dangers for the sake of wealth, while we spend neither labor nor

money for wisdom." 31 Hence for Horace often the mercator

is the foe of his own chief ethical views: Contentmentwith Little,and Moderationin Living. Hence, too, the foe of the common-

wealth.32 But here in C., I, 3 any such philosophical association,although perhaps foreshadowed in the commercial images at the

start of the poem (see p. 147), would seem at the most to be a

subordinate theme. Rather, in this work we appear to be back

in the classical age of Greece, and the emphasis is not on the

sinfulness of sailing but on the intrepidity of man-his vaultingambition in defiance of the gods.

If the emphasis of lines 9-20 lies in the praise of courage,

may not the situation, then, be quite the reverse of what Mooreproposed? The poem would not be tactless in the face of Virgil's

"enterprise," but, on the contrary, a good part of it would be

inspired by this "enterprise." One always dislikes to see a

beloved friend depart. One feels grief. And then, if his tripis likely to be dangerous, one may admire the courage and

bravery of the friend. In the end, this admiration may receive

more expression than the grief. The admiration may be con-

siderably out of proportion with reality, but all the same it isan unconscious testimony to one's affection. And at this point,Horace's grief has shifted to admiration for Virgil's courage,and from there to man's courage. It is not, at this juncture, a

matter whether such courage in man is good or bad or both, or

what it finally brings to man; so far, it is merely a question of

the courage itself as an admirable force.

In lines 21-33 we move on, again in a subtle fashion, to

another theme. God is prudens, just as in C., III, 29, 29-30:

30See references collected under "Merchant" by Nybakken (cited in

note 29), p. 63.

31Frag. 52 Rose (p. 62, lines 9 ff.), on which see W. Jaeger, Aristotle

(trans. R. Robinson, Oxford, 1934), pp. 59-60.

32 See Solmsen (cited in note 8), pp. 344-5 and passim on Horace's

connection of ethics with politics.

150

8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952


HORACE," C.," I, 3.

prudens futuri temporis exitum

caliginosanocte

premit deus,but man is audax (line 25) But what sort of arrangement is

this? Why should God be called prudens for separating lands

from (by?) oceans? Because God, separating out the elements,

put man in the element, land, where he was to belong and be

safe.33 But man in his audacia leaves his natural element, and

puts out to sea, and thus works his own ruin per vetitum nefas,

hastening Death's approach. What, then, of the "forbidden

wickedness "? Is it not in defiance of God's separation of theelements and assignment of man to the land that man's courageis revealed, and courage, too, of an heroic and tragic sort? And

for this courage, symbolized here by the picture of men againstthe sea, man suffers and in the end often encompasses his own

downfall.

. . . Samson hath quit himselflike Samson, and heroicly hath finished

a life heroic, . . .This shift in emphasis from the negative side of impietas to

heroic courage and ultimate ruin is surely the reason for

bringing in, at this moment, Prometheus, who, like man (line

25), was also audax (line 27).But to digress for a bit on the workings of Horace's poetic

imagination, one must turn back to Hesiod. For we meet an

ambivalence in the Horatian mind. On the one hand, the poet

used sailing-appropriately since the poem is a propempticon-in a commonplace, moralistic fashion as a form of impietas.But he became serious and enthusiastic when this convention

led him to ponder the role of man, and the impious courage

3s Cf. Plutarch's comment on the sea as TroXe'uopvf f?iet rov diOpcwrouaroxelopv (Qu. Cony., 729 B). Kiessling-Heinze are surely right in

holding that the emphasis of these lines is on " das Festland als sicheren

Wohnsitz vom Meere, das nicht beriihrt werden sollte," and any such

interpretation as that implied by P. Shorey, Horace Odes and Epodes(Boston, 1904), p. 155, that God isolated men in various continentsso as to give them peace, seems unjustified. As for dissociabili

(on which see T. L. L., sub voc.), Kiessling-Heinze (" dissociabilis nicht

quod dissociari oder dissociare potest, sondern = insociabilis [indomitaeet insociabili genti Liv. XXXVII, 1] . . .wobei dis- wie in dispar, dissi-milis nicht lediglich negiert, sondern separiert") seem preferable to

Bentley's contention that it has here an active force.

151

8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952


8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952


HORACE, "C.," 1, S. 153

But the career of this craftsman and inventor has been a splendid

and brave one, worth the final penalty. And now one feels thatHorace's admiration, born of the momentary mood and no con-

stant characteristic, has reached its fulness. For the instant,as he is swept along on his course,he contemplates only the heroic

greatness of man. It may be a greatness which will finally cause

his fall. But no matter. In this mood the humanist Horace

admires man, the hero. Thus he can proudly and exuberantly

declare, despite Heaven itself, that

nil mortalibus ardui est (37),

just as Goethe could proclaim that

Nur allein der Mensch

Vermag das Unmogliche.

And this is the humanism of Sophocles,when he reflected on the

wonder of man: " this marvelouscreature,driven by stormy south

winds, crosses even the gray sea, passing half-buried through the

wave that would ingulf him." 86Then comes the climax, Hercules. The poet has traversedthe

elements of water (sailing), of fire (Prometheus), of air (Dae-

dalus), and now we descend to earth (to the underworld with

Hercules to break the bonds of Death). The poet has said in

lines 32-33 that Prometheus' theft hastens the approachof Death,but he also called Death inevitable.37 One might think, then,that one was in the Hellenistic world, not the classical, if it were

not for Hercules and his Harrowing of hell-perrupit Acheronta.This is certainly the heroic Hercules of the Iliad,38 of Pindar,39

and later of Seneca,40 he Hercules who defied Death. And for

him Death was not the end. Horace tells us his reward in

another ode:

hac arte Pollux et vagus Herculesenisus arcis attigit igneas (C., III, 3, 9-10),

6Antig., 332 ff.87As in C., III, 1, 14 and 24, 6; see Solmsen (cited in note 8), p. 347,

note 36.38

E, 395 ff.

s3 Ol., 9, 33.

4?Herc. Fur., 889 ff., on which see J. Kroll, Gott u. H6lle (Teubner,

1932), pp. 440-1.

8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952


8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952


J. P. ELDER.

the hero who is the fool:

caelum ipsum petimus stultitia, nequeper nostrum patimur scelus

iracunda Iovem ponere fulmina

(C., I, 3, 38-40).

Heroism is nobility, but is also folly, but a folly well worth the

ultimate suffering. The best of men will go on defying Heaven.

They will pay the penalty, but the splendor of mankind remains.

Hence the ironical close of the poem, as this poet of the cos-

mopolis weighs humanity. For after all, it is we, the mortals,the bold ones, who do not "allow " prudent Zeus to lay aside

his thunderbolts. Not Zeus who does "allow " us Zeus is

foreverkept busy by courageousman. And on this partly defiant,

partly tired note the poem ends.

The work, then, according to this interpretation is anythingbut a tactless expressionof outmodedphilosophicalviews. Rather,it is the tragic story of the bravery of men, and one the insight

to which was perhaps given the poet as he began to think onVirgil's trip, the possible loss of his animae dimidium meae,

Virgil's courage, and the meaning of man's heroic courage, and

the glory and ruin it contains for men. It is, in fine, a poemfilled with the Greek spirit of tragic heroism.

Finally, how appropriate would the poem, on such an inter-

pretation, be to Virgil?' Perhaps there is, and need be, no

specificanswerto this question. If the views set forth abovecon-

tain any truth, then it might be enough to supposethat a work soimbuedwith the spirit of classical Greecewould indeed be accept-able to Virgil at any time, and particularly as he was about to

sail off to Greece.

But if one wishes to hunt for more definite links, possibly the

Fourth and Sixth Eclogues should be studied.43 In the Sixth,lines 41-44, Virgil gives a brief resume of the world's past in

the mention of Pyrrha, Saturn, Prometheus, and Hylas. The

Saturnia regna, reflecting Hesiod's views (see abovep. 152), and

suggestive of redeunt Saturnia regna of the Fourth Eclogue

(line 6), implies an age when there was no sailing. Another

link may exist in the reference to Hylas. For he naturally

I' Such a connection is suggested, though not developed, by Kellogg

(cited in note 25), p. 83.

156

8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952


HORACE, "C.," I, 3.

suggests Hercules, and in C., I, 3 as in this poem we find the

combination of Prometheus and Hercules. And then one recallsthat it was Hercules who finally freed Prometheus. Further,

Hylas calls to mind the Argonauts and, as Jachmann suggested,44the Hylas reference in this passage (E., 6, 41-44) may be meant

to remind the reader of the first sailors and their courage. Her-

cules, as one of the Argonauts (albeit not an original one),would be amongst these pioneers in the minds of Virgil and

Horace. Lastly, the next person mentioned after this sequence

is Pasiphae, who might suggest Daedalus. Perhaps, then, suchallusions may have been in Horace's thoughts as he wrote this

poem to Virgil.

Perhaps, too, elements in the Fourth Eclogue may have influ-

enced Horace in C., I, 3. If Skutsch was right in believing that

the Fourth to a degreewas a reply to Horace's Sixteenth Epode,"4then it might not be unreasonableto propose that Horace some-

times had the Fourth in mind as he wrote the propempticon to

Virgil. For example, when Horace in C., I, 3 turns back toHesiod (see above, p. 152), does he do so deliberately, recallingthat Virgil had done so in this eclogue in which he may have

answered Horace's epode? 46 Then, too, the Fourth Ecloguerefers to the sceleris vestigia nostri (line 13). This is almost

certainly a localized reference to the civil wars. But this theme

is expanded by Virgil later in the poem when, with this phrase

consciously or unconsciously in mind, he writes, in the same

metrical position, priscae vestigia fraudis (line 31). This phrase

44G. Jachmann, "Vergils Sechste Ekloge," Hermes, LVIII (1923),

p. 294.4"F. Skutsch, "(Sechzehnte Epode u. vierte Ekloge," Neue Jahrb.,

XXIII (1909), pp. 23-35. Among recent studies on this subject, two

seem especially valuable: E. Griset, "Ancora sul famoso epodo XVI di

Orazio," II Mondo Class., VIII (1938), pp. 33-41; K. Barwick, "Zur

Interpretation u. Chronologie d. 4. Ecloge d. Vergil u. d. 16. u. 7. Epoded. Horaz," Philol., XCVI (1943), pp. 28-67.

4 While Virgil, of course, drew heavily upon Hesiod for generalelements in his picture of the Golden Age, he also seems to have used

actual Hesiodic phraseology (e.g. cf. E., 4, 18 with Op., 118; E., 4, 30

with Op., 232 f.; E., 4, 39 with Op., 236 ff.). Similarly, K. Barwick,"Horaz Carm. I, 2 u. Vergil," Philol., XC (1935), pp. 257-76, suggeststhat in C., I, 2 Horace wished deliberately to recall G., I, 463 (to show

that the prayer had finally been heard).

157

8/12/2019 Elder, Horace, C 1 3 1952


J. P. ELDER.

comes close in meaning to Horace's per nostrum scelus (C., I, 3,

39). For Virgil then goes on at once to declarethat for a while,before the advent of the Golden Age, men will continue to sail

the seas, to gird towns about with walls, and to plough the soil.

Then he adds

alter erit tum Tiphys, et altera quae vehat Argodelectos heroas . . . (34-35).

Now we are back to the theme of the braveryof these first sailors,and indeed in delectos heroas we are back to Hesiod's fourth

age of man, the heroic age. This, too, Horace may have had inmind as he developedthe theme of heroism in his propempticon.

Finally, if Virgil had been considering the composition of the

Aeneid at the time C., I, 3 was written to him, or if indeed he

had already begun at that time his prose or perhaps even his

poetic version, then it may not be utterly fanciful to imaginethat Horace was familiar with some of Virgil's plans and

thoughts, and to see some general connections between the pro-

pempticon and the projectedepic. If C., I, 3 is devotedto heroic

man, to his courage and trials and nobility and suffering, surelysuch a poem would not be inappropriate to the poet ponderingthe charactersand fates of an Aeneas or a Dido or a Turnus, and

the full significance for mankind of pietas and impietas.

J. P. ELDER.

HARVARDNIVERSITY.

158

elder, horace, c 1 3 1952

Documents